Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
November 27, 2015, 12:26:50 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
90482 Posts in 2291 Topics by 1080 Members
Latest Member: Tedbo
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 700
201  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / WaPo decimates Baraq on: November 13, 2015, 03:41:39 PM
202  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Not what we predicted on: November 13, 2015, 03:22:04 PM
The Producer Price Index Dropped 0.4% in October To view this article, Click Here
Brian S. Wesbury, Chief Economist
Robert Stein, Deputy Chief Economist
Date: 11/13/2015

The Producer Price Index (PPI) dropped 0.4% in October, coming in well below the consensus expected gain of 0.2%. Producer prices are down 1.7% versus a year ago.

The drop in producer prices in October was led by final demand services, down 0.3%. Food prices declined 0.8% in October while energy prices were unchanged. Producer prices excluding food and energy were down 0.3%.

In the past year, prices for goods are down 5.0%, while prices for services are up 0.1%. Private capital equipment prices rose 0.2% in October and are unchanged in the past year.

Prices for intermediate processed goods declined 0.4% in October and are down 7.6% versus a year ago. Prices for intermediate unprocessed goods were unchanged in October, and are down 23.6% versus a year ago.

Implications: Producer prices continued to plummet in October, as margins for wholesalers and falling food costs led the drop. The 0.4% decline in October comes on the back of September’s 0.5% decline, but unlike last month, energy wasn’t the culprit. Final demand service prices accounted for more than two-thirds of the drop in October, as margins for wholesalers and retailers fell 0.7%. Despite the fall in service prices over the past two months, prices for services are essentially unchanged in the past year, up a modest 0.1%. Goods prices also fell in October led by a 0.8% decline in food prices. Prices for goods are down 5% from a year ago. While energy prices were unchanged in October (after three consecutive months of declines), they still account for nearly the entire decline in producer prices over the past year. Excluding just energy, producer prices are down 0.1% in the past year, compared to a 1.7% decline when energy is included. The Fed has reiterated that falling energy prices are a transitory factor. So we think these declines will not play a significant role when they decide whether to raise rates in December. Core producer prices, which take out both the volatile food and energy components, declined 0.3% in October but are up 0.1% in the past year. In other words, we are not in a persistent deflationary environment. We’d like to see the Fed raise rates and think a rate hike in December remains likely. Holding short-term rates near zero distorts the nature and timing of economic and financial activity and our economy will eventually pay a price for that. In other recent economic news, still no sign of inflation in the trade sector. Import prices declined 0.5% in October and are down 10.5% from a year ago. The drop is mostly from petroleum, but not all of it; import prices are down 3.4% from a year ago even excluding petroleum. Export prices declined 0.2% in October and are down 6.7% from a year ago.
203  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Sanders vs. Paul debate? on: November 13, 2015, 03:04:40 PM
204  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / humor on: November 13, 2015, 02:51:51 PM
205  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Dr. Ben Carson on: November 13, 2015, 02:44:46 PM
Marc F.,

There is a dangerous trend underway on our college campuses, from the University of Missouri to my alma mater of Yale University. Free speech and open dialogue are being trampled.

We are getting to the point where people can say, "I don't like what you're doing. It's offensive," and therefore believe they have the right to be violent or shout people down.

Not only is this infantile, but it's an affront to the First Amendment.

But let's not kid ourselves -- this is part of a larger problem in our society.

People are using political correctness as a tool to silence those with whom they disagree, and rather than having an open dialogue to solve our many problems, people get into their respective corners and demonize each other.

One of the main reasons I'm running for President is to push back against this type of behavior.

As I said in my closing statement at this week's debate, we can move beyond our current division and despair not by "We the Democrats" or "We the Republicans," but as "We the People" of America working together, and realizing that we are not each other's enemies.

I'm happy to tell you that we've now launched "Students for Carson" chapters on thousands of college campuses across the country. I'm hopeful that in their own small way, they will do their part to "heal, inspire and revive" our great nation.
206  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Wesbury: It's the domestic spending stupid on: November 13, 2015, 02:38:44 PM
207  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: November 13, 2015, 01:49:27 PM

208  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Donald Trump on: November 13, 2015, 01:04:28 PM
Thank you Pat.

Though what we see of Trump in these things underwhelms me and IMHO diminishes him as a candidate, especially against Hillary, I too find myself doubting the belt buckle story.  Frankly it smells to me to be a bit of a whopper, perhaps by an Erkel looking to thug up his story a bit and add zip to his story of redemption.

What concerns me more are things like Trump's apparently specious grasp of the meaning of Putin's play in Syria.
209  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / A bit of spine spotted in UK? on: November 13, 2015, 11:37:46 AM
210  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Donald Trump on: November 13, 2015, 11:34:14 AM
We await your assessment Pat.
211  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: November 13, 2015, 11:30:43 AM
"(W)atch the head to head matchups with Hillary.  As the primaries get close, this becomes a contest of who can win the general election.  In the latest, Carson is still matching up the best and Trump the worst.
Small samples, lousy polling.  It's still fluid. Supporters of certain candidates may decide they like their guy but maybe not for President."

Yes.  I would add that for a while now many of these small sample polls are showing the same thing-- Carson polling the best against Hillary and Trump the worst of the Rep majors.  IIRC one had Carson up by 11 against Hillary and Trump down by 3.

I defend Carson against what I perceive the be the excesses and imprecisions of Pat's criticisms of him, but of course I am aware of what may turn out to be some seriously weak links in Carson as a candidate and as a president.
212  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Dr. Ben Carson on: November 13, 2015, 11:25:20 AM
"Carson has said on more than one occasion that he wants the No Fly Zone in Syria."

Making sure they we are understanding each other, the NFZ along the Turkish border would be in Syria, but not where the Russians are currently flying.
213  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Hamilton 1788 on: November 13, 2015, 11:22:41 AM
And this is why our Founding Fathers gave us a constitutional republic, and not a democracy.

"It is an unquestionable truth, that the body of the people in every country desire sincerely its prosperity. But it is equally unquestionable that they do not possess the discernment and stability necessary for systematic government. To deny that they are frequently led into the grossest of errors, by misinformation and passion, would be a flattery which their own good sense must despise." —Alexander Hamilton, 1788
214  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Dershowitz: Selective outrage on: November 13, 2015, 02:29:25 AM
215  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Dr. Ben Carson on: November 13, 2015, 02:15:19 AM
I think if you look into it, Dr. Ben is not suggesting a no-fly zone where Russians are already conducting operations but elsewhere, perhaps along the Turkish border, where the refugee camps are.  This seems pretty reasonable to me; if we can't provide safe haven for them in Syria, then it will be hard to stop them from invading Europe even more.  If they have safe haven, it establishes the prerequisite for sending those in Europe back to the safe haven.

216  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Dr. Ben Carson on: November 12, 2015, 07:44:58 PM
Thanks.  I wouldn't have predicted that.
217  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Semper Fi Hillary! on: November 12, 2015, 07:41:34 PM
218  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Did someone say apology? Calling Baraq Obama , , , on: November 12, 2015, 01:56:16 PM
The Iranian nuclear deal could lead to improved relations between the Tehran and Washington, including the eventual reopening of embassies in both capitals, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said Nov. 12, Reuters reported, citing Italy’s Corriere della Sera. However, the United States would need to correct errors committed in the past 37 years and apologize to the Iranian people, Rouhani said. One day the embassies will reopen, he said, but if Washington does not respect its end of the nuclear deal, relations will remain the same. Washington and Tehran are entering a much broader, more public strategic dialogue.
219  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Dr. Ben Carson on: November 12, 2015, 01:54:12 PM
Meaning he goes from 25% to 27.5% or from 25% to 35%?
220  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Dr. Ben Carson on: November 12, 2015, 01:26:17 PM
It will be interesting to see what is made of this.

If it goes badly for Carson, I don't see much of his base going to Trump though.
221  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / WSJ: See you in Cleveland on: November 12, 2015, 01:23:07 PM
GOP Voters: See You in Cleveland
​None of the candidates is likely to win a majority of primary delegates.​
By Daniel Henninger
Nov. 11, 2015 6:54 p.m. ET

Dive into the political Web and somewhere you’ll find this now-unavoidable headline: 10 Things We Learned From the GOP Debate. Let’s keep it simple. What we learned at the debate in Milwaukee was one thing: This campaign won’t end until it gets to Cleveland.

None of these candidates looks likely to pull away and capture the majority of primary delegates before the party’s nominating convention in Cleveland next July.

After Tuesday’s debate, the fourth evening we’ve all spent with these people, it’s hard for me to see why a round of brokering in Cleveland isn’t the most likely outcome.

This is the most volatile presidential nominating race in memory. Opinion polls, with all their statistical limitations, are playing a dominant role determining who stays on Debate Island and who gets thrown off.
After the GOP presidential debate in Milwaukee, Nov. 10. ENLARGE
After the GOP presidential debate in Milwaukee, Nov. 10. Photo: joshua lott/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images

Buried in this polling, however, is the reality that these preferences aren’t much more than sentiments. Most voters admit they haven’t picked a horse. Tuesday’s debate showed why.

In the third debate, on Oct. 28, after strong performances by Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, conventional tea-leaf reading said they would rise as Donald Trump and Ben Carson inevitably faded.

Ben Carson just spent a week passing through an intense crucible over his biographical credibility. After Tuesday evening’s good performance, I’d say Ben Carson isn’t going to fade.

As to Donald Trump, well, we’re close to the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade, and every year you simply marvel at how those fabulous balloons stay afloat.

On Tuesday, Mr. Trump, wending his way through the minimum wage issue, said: “Wages are too high.” He survived saying John McCain isn’t a war hero and George W. Bush didn’t keep us safe on 9/11. But this?

Mr. Trump’s blue-collar base is entering its eighth year of Barack Obama’s low-wage economy. If saying wages are too high doesn’t sink him, then he isn’t going to fade from the primaries.

Still, that crack just gave Hillary Clinton’s campaign its Mitt Romney Moment. They would plaster the billionaire’s “wages are too high” across every TV market in the Midwest’s battleground states.

These debates are largely presentation exercises, and Donald Trump survives because his presentation skills are astonishing. Last Friday evening on “The O’Reilly Factor,” Mr. Trump blew right through every direct question Bill O’Reilly asked him. It’s an amazing performance, when he isn’t bellowing.

Jeb Bush, meanwhile, is obviously prone to brain cramps. The people of Washington, Iowa, likely will forgive him for clutching on why they aren’t like Washington, D.C. John Kasich’s remark about what Jeb was “trying to say” about bank capital requirements was nasty if irresistible.

But Mr. Bush did what everyone knew he had to. He kept himself on the field with strong comments on the Obama regulatory blizzard, energy policy and especially his own mockery of Hillary’s “A” grade for the wheezing Obama economy.

Mr. Bush needs to finish no worse than fourth in Iowa’s February caucuses and notch a win or second in New Hampshire. If he survives those tests, the Bush money and campaign machinery will make him competitive through South Carolina and Super Tuesday.

But “competitive” is his minimum baseline now, not last June’s “front-runner.” Mr. Bush looks like a Kentucky Derby favorite running deep in the pack along the rail on the backstretch. His fade tightened the odds for everyone else in the race.

Maybe it’s unfair that the debates have such an outsize role in sorting candidates for the U.S. presidency, but the presentation exercises are useful and revelatory.

Take Ted Cruz. His strategy is to collect “outsider” support if the Carson or Trump campaigns falter. It’s a plausible gambit. But . . .

On one hand, Mr. Cruz Tuesday gave a handsome summary of how to achieve higher growth through Reaganomics: low taxes, deregulation and sound monetary policy. He’s impressive on these important but complex subjects.

But his top pander line—“If Republicans join Democrats as the party of amnesty, we will lose”—fell flat with the Milwaukee audience. Set aside the substance of this issue. The problem is that it was so patently opportunistic. It’s a Cruz quirk and liability. At the margin, it could suppress his vote in big-state primaries, such as Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin—battleground states in the general election.

Marco Rubio swings from home-run rhetoric (the minimum wage will “make people more expensive than a machine”) to trite plug-and-play speeches. Did you know his father was a bartender?

Carly Fiorina often starts strong, then talks past any point of interest. Rand Paul demolished Marco Rubio’s family tax credit as a trillion-dollar outlay, then left his chin hanging on national security. Mr. Rubio ducked the tax credit and flattened him.

Undercard king Chris Christie is now the contest’s legitimate dark horse. If he talks personally to every GOP voter in New Hampshire, he may win there. But he’s sooo far back everywhere else.

Get used to hearing “no clear winner” and “no clear front-runner.” Until Cleveland. 
222  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Stratfor: The coming fustercluck in the Balkans on: November 12, 2015, 01:00:41 PM

Two notable developments occurred Nov. 11 related to Europe's migrant crisis, notable not so much for what they directly achieved but for their potential effects. Both events concerned the migration route that passes across the eastern Mediterranean and up through the Balkans, which has been largely responsible for the massive uptick in immigrant numbers in 2015. The first was a statement from the Czech Republic's deputy prime minister, Andrej Babis, who said that since Greece has not been adequately controlling its borders it should be ejected from the Schengen zone, which allows free movement of people in Europe. The second was the news that Slovenia has begun to erect a fence on its border with Croatia.

Babis' comments are important: Greece's exclusion from the Schengen area would deal a blow both to the European Union itself and to Greece's place within it. The links among its members have already been strained by the immigrant crisis, with some countries claiming emergency conditions and erecting fences with their non-Schengen neighbors, while others have suspended border crossings within the borderless zone, temporarily nullifying its effects. If a country were to be booted out of the borderless area, it would be a further blow to the structural integrity of the entire initiative. For Greece, meanwhile, whose continued existence in the European Union has been in doubt for much of the year primarily for financial reasons, would see another rope that ties it to the union severed, creating even more distance between Greeks and their European counterparts and thus facilitating an eventual Grexit.

What is a Geopolitical Diary?

Potentially consequential though Babis' statements may be, Greece is probably not leaving the Schengen area any time soon. Europe's leaders will be well aware of the risks its departure creates, and kicking Greece out would not actually help the situation that much. This is because Schengen is a system designed to make it easy to cross the borders that exist between Schengen members, removing the need for papers to be checked. Greece's Schengen membership is not a factor in the current crisis because Greece does not have any Schengen neighbors, so any migrants traveling by land are entering the Schengen area when they enter Greece, but they then leave it again to continue up through the Balkans before entering it once more in countries such as Hungary or Slovenia. If migrants were entering Greece and at that stage booking flights or ferries to other Schengen territories, it might be an issue. But at this stage they are not (at least not in significant numbers).

It is the second development that actually has the potential to change the situation on the ground more dramatically. Slovenia has said it is building a fence to control the flow of migrants — not to cut off that flow — but once the building has begun it is not hard to imagine it continuing to its natural conclusion. This would close off the narrow passage through which the migrants currently pass. Throughout the year, migrants have taken small boats from Turkey to Greek islands, ridden to the mainland by ferry, and made their way up through Macedonia and Serbia to Europe. Hungary's erection of fences on its border first with Serbia and then with Croatia has steadily driven the flow westward, until the majority of the migrants have been passing through the bottleneck of the Croatia-Slovenia border. This has created so many problems in Slovenia that they have decided to erect a fence to inhibit migrants. If the fence did end up passing all the way from the Hungarian border to the Adriatic Sea, it would finally plug the migrants' route, since there would be no way to continue going west — at least not by land.

Under such circumstances, the migrants, whose flow to Europe has thus far not abated in November, would be facing some hard choices. If they decided to take their chances on an eastern land route up through Romania, there would be a high likelihood that Hungary would soon erect a fence on that border as well, just as it did on its border with Serbia and Croatia earlier in the year. At that stage, the migrants might continue northward, assuming they could overcome the barrier of the Carpathian Mountains, and into Ukraine, which is not currently the most hospitable of states, and on to Slovakia and Poland, which are themselves two of the more anti-migrant countries.

Alternatively, migrants might start to seek different routes to Europe, routes that would probably require another sea crossing into Italy, most easily at the top of the peninsula between Croatia and Trieste. If that were inhibited by Croatian and Italian authorities, migrants would have to attempt a longer crossing farther down the Adriatic Sea. This would be similar (though in most cases longer) to the crossing they would have made from Turkey to Greece, though it is unlikely that they would be able to find transport so easily. After a year of building migrant flows there is now a small cottage industry operating off the Turkish coast that provides inflatable boats for the quantities of people making the crossing every day, but even this very mobile and opportunistic industry would take a while to get going on the Dalmatian coast. The high numbers of migrants butting up against the new Slovenian fence would be unlikely to be able to find an accommodating group of black market traffickers able to provide vessels for so many customers at such short notice.

Thus, faced with these two unattractive options, there is a high possibility that many of these migrants would find themselves stuck on the wrong side of the European fences for an extended period. This would have the potential to be very destructive. The Balkan states, which would then have to cope with large numbers of people not just passing through but actually remaining, have already exchanged angry words this year. For a multitude of ethnic and historical reasons the region has a reputation for being a powder keg, and throwing in the spark of having to support large numbers of migrants who cannot go forward and cannot go back could have serious consequences. Added to the regional tensions there is also the possibility of a humanitarian crisis as winter draws in, and these countries are some of the least prepared in Europe to be able to provide extensive facilities for these people. Slovenia, then, constitutes an ever-narrowing bottleneck through which the flow of migrants is still being allowed to pass. The consequences of shutting this bottleneck, if it were to happen, could be disastrous for the region and for Europe as a whole.
223  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / The Battle to Militarize Space has begun on: November 12, 2015, 12:58:42 PM
second post

 The Battle to Militarize Space Has Begun
November 11, 2015 | 10:13 GMT Print
Text Size
The U.S. Navy's fourth Mobile User Objective System (MUOS) communications satellite, encapsulated in a 5-meter payload fairing, lifts off from Space Launch Complex-41 in Florida. (United Launch Alliance/Released)

    As existing technologies proliferate and new developments provide greater access to space, Cold War frameworks for the peaceful sharing of Earth's near orbit will erode.
    The reliance on space-based systems, such as satellites, and the deterioration of existing regulations make the militarization of space inevitable.
    The U.S. reliance on electronic networking for military and intelligence operations is a key vulnerability that countries such as China could exploit.
    Competition for resources in the solar system will inevitably lead to conflict and military posturing.


Editor's Note: Stratfor charts the evolution of geopolitically significant technologies. In recent years, the effort to push Earth's boundaries and to exploit the reaches of near-Earth and interplanetary space has accelerated, thanks in part to scientific discoveries and impetus from the private sector. There has also been renewed interest from national militaries, as space-exploring countries vie for dominance and control over the regulatory environment. Stratfor will continue to explore the imperatives behind the push to dominate space, the inherent constraints of operating beyond Earth's gravity well and protective atmosphere, and the new developments in materials, science and engineering that will help facilitate further exploration. This first installment of a continuing and occasional series looks at the emergence of space as a competitive arena and at the legal frameworks, not updated since the Cold War, that govern Earth's immediate vicinity.

For most strategic planners, space represents the ultimate high ground. In the same way that control of the skies added a new dimension to combat in the great wars of the 20th century, the military exploitation of space will be a defining characteristic of the 21st century. German rocket technology propelled the first unmanned systems into space during the latter stages of World War II. These systems traveled beyond the Karman line — the commonly accepted boundary between Earth and space, at around 100 kilometers altitude (62 miles). From the late 1950s onward, the ability to routinely launch manned and unmanned systems into orbit heralded a new era of competition between the Soviet bloc and the West, led by the United States. As the Cold War progressed, the utilization of the near-Earth environment shaped a new strategic aspect to the conflict and added another battlefield in which the world's superpowers could compete.

In the standoff between the post-war powers, intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) were the only weapons to enter space. They were projected on an arc that took them beyond the Earth's atmosphere before deploying warheads carried by re-entry vehicles to their targets. There were no existing defensive systems that could be stationed in space or close enough to ensure the destruction of the ballistic missiles themselves or of their deadly payloads. The development, staging and maintenance of space-based weapons and bases was untenable at the time, so treaties limiting what could be done in Earth's immediate vicinity were relatively uncontroversial and easy to pass.

These pacts also hoped to address some of the prevalent fears of the time, including concerns about nuclear explosions in space and about debris descending back to Earth. U.N.-brokered regulations were based on existing Cold War technologies, capabilities and expectations, influenced by the fact that emerging space law was particularly ambiguous. Therefore, existing international law considers the lowest perigee attainable by an orbiting craft: Anything in orbit is taken to be in international space, and anything not orbiting is accepted to be in national airspace. The problem with legal ambiguity, however, is the extent to which gray areas can be exploited for gain.

Yet, as technology improved and countries' strategic imperatives evolved, so did the consideration given to the domination of space. The announcement of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) by former U.S. President Ronald Reagan in 1983 was heavily criticized, but it proved that the logical evolution of missile defense involved orbital platforms as well as ground-based systems. Although the initiative — known by its more popular moniker Star Wars — did not reach fruition, the United States still achieved global military superiority in the years following the collapse of the Soviet Union.

In achieving military dominance, the United States came to increasingly rely on space-based infrastructure to wage war. While Washington adhered to the prohibition on placing offensive weapons — including kinetic kill systems, directed energy weapons platforms and missile-carrying satellites — in space permanently, the United States installed a huge portion of its electronic networking capability in orbit, enabling it to intervene in conflicts around the globe. Military satellites were the lynchpin of a network-centric approach to operations, comprising command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance structures, better known as C4ISR. The evolution of C4ISR coincided with the advent of precision-guided munitions and the drone revolution, enabling the free movement of near real-time data. Everything from GPS, early warning monitoring, weather tracking, tactical and strategic communications, and full-spectrum intelligence gathering is facilitated through the United States' expansive network of military satellites.

However, the U.S. military is not the sole operator of space-based infrastructure. Countries with advanced space programs, such as China, Russia, Israel, Japan and some NATO alliance members, all rely on some military space-based capability. And the trend is only increasing. As much as the United States leads the field, however, it is increasingly reliant on its space-based systems — of which a significant percentage are highly vulnerable and largely indefensible. This vulnerability has not escaped the notice of the United States' biggest competitors. By finding a way to disable space-based systems, a potential antagonist could disconnect the multiple interlocking U.S. military systems, plunging it into information darkness and delivering a critical blow ahead of any physical strike — and to do so would not violate any existing space treaty.
Emerging Threats

The single biggest example of this threat to U.S. military orbital systems comes from China. A progression of Chinese anti-satellite missile tests carried out over the past few years has alarmed the Pentagon. Though there are still limitations to the effectiveness of ground-based anti-satellite weapons — namely the tracking and accuracy requirements, given the speed, size and altitude of satellites — the technology is rapidly advancing. For countries that are still developing militarily, there is a strong incentive to pursue anti-satellite technology in the hope it could neutralize or disrupt one of the greatest advantages that the United States has: its C4ISR infrastructure.

Most other countries do not have the same vulnerabilities as the United States, which makes it difficult for Washington to impose the kind of retaliatory deterrence structure that worked so well during the nuclear arms race. In other words, the United States cannot use the threat of disabling other countries' space-based communications infrastructure to prevent attacks because other countries do not rely as heavily on the technology. So U.S. Space Command faces a conundrum: How does it cover what is a largely exposed and defenseless flank?

Perhaps partly because of concerns over Chinese anti-satellite tests — the most recent of which was conducted Oct. 30 — the Pentagon has recently started to talk about "space control." And the shift in language could indicate a change to the U.S. defense approach. Washington knows that to be proactive may mean stepping beyond the boundaries of the Outer Space Treaty, and the move would not be without precedent: Reagan showed a willingness to overstep the treaty with his Star Wars program, though he was ultimately stalled because of a lack of political will and technological capability.
The Space Race

As Washington works to secure its orbital technology, it also realizes that competitors are catching up. This is not to say that the U.S. military has been negligent in developing and expanding its capabilities. The United States leads the field in ballistic missile defense (BMD), and many of its maturing systems are designed to operate outside of the Earth's atmosphere. The United States also dominates space-tracking infrastructure: Being able to see other countries' space-based systems is beneficial from both a defensive and offensive perspective.

The U.S. Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system has the ability to reach into space and to attack ICBMs in the middle of their flight trajectory. A key component of GMD is something known as an exoatmospheric kill vehicle, which separates from its boost vehicle in space and collides with an incoming projectile. This technology does not violate existing space treaties but is revealing of the way military planners — and the defense industries that serve them — are thinking.

Regulation and enforcement is not clear, but the trend is. As militaries around the globe expand their capabilities, so will they increase their reliance on space-based systems. Thus space will become increasingly militarized. The push to expand, occupy and dominate space will eventually erode the efficacy of the current treaty structures set in place decades ago. Currently, all space-based military infrastructure supports terrestrial operations. But long-term considerations about the eventual exploitation of resources in the broader solar system factor into current debates. When space exploration and the collection and refinement of resources become economically feasible, competition will inevitably ensue.

History tells us that such opportunities for resources rarely go smoothly or unchallenged, though deep-sea mining shows us that peaceful competition is possible. Still, generally, competition on Earth has led to perpetual conflict and military posturing, so it is logical that competition for resources elsewhere could inevitably lead to more conflict and could necessitate the ability to project military power there in one form or another. Closer to home, we can look to the opening of the Arctic for comparison: There is no clear precedent for ownership, there are mineral resources present, and only certain countries have the technological know-how to explore and exploit such an inhospitable environment. Countries have already staked their claims and military posturing has begun. As the ability to capture the riches of the solar system becomes more viable, it is highly likely that similar disputes will emerge in the more forbidding environment of space.
224  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Stratfor: The Militarization of Space on: November 12, 2015, 12:56:18 PM
"The Militarization of Space is republished with permission of Stratfor."
225  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history on: November 12, 2015, 12:31:37 PM
My system is choking on pages from Glenn Beck's Blaze site.  Could someone please paste this article here?
226  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Morris on Reagan Democrats (Cruz was effective) on: November 12, 2015, 12:30:36 PM
227  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history on: November 12, 2015, 11:22:40 AM
We search for Truth.  Thank you gentlemen.

As much as I loathe Hillary, I will be dropping this particular accusation.
228  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Dr. Ben Carson on: November 12, 2015, 10:57:20 AM
Let's bring these posts over to the discussion on the Immigration thread.
229  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 12, 2015, 10:56:33 AM
Why is that so hard?


Most people are persuaded by anecdotal "evidence".

Let's say you have two illegal and fecund Mexican parents who have been here ten years and they have four children (i.e. who are broadly understood to be American citizens.)  Let's say the children are 9, 7, 5, and 3, and she's pregnant.  The first three are all in school, and speak English and little to no Spanish.  To make things worse, they have Bambi eyes.  One or both of the parents are working hard and they are paying taxes and have no legal issues apart from their presence here.

Out of 11 million illegal aliens my best guess is that the other side will be able to find plenty of cases like this.

Do you really want to go into the elections saying these American citizens should be uprooted from the only thing they have ever known and shipped off to bumfuck narco-stan in Mexico?

230  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history on: November 12, 2015, 10:45:19 AM
My system is choking on pages from Glenn Beck's Blaze site.  Could someone please paste this article here?
231  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history on: November 12, 2015, 10:24:57 AM
I am having trouble finding the citations for Hillary being fired from the Watergate Committee and the allegations of a retraction by the man who "fired" her.  Help please.
232  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Where we stand now on illegals on: November 12, 2015, 10:16:37 AM
One of the key themes in the debate was the matter of what to do about the illegals here.

We here have tended to the absolutist line of thought.  Illegal= throw him/her out.  Period.

However IMHO this line of thought has a fundamental problem:  There are MANY cases where the parents are illegal and the child born here.  Until the country decides/realizes that birthright citizenship is not the law, that make the child an American.  Thus the absolutist position contains within it separating parents and children. 


Discuss please.
233  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Hirsa Ali: Islam is a religion of violence (and what to do about it) on: November 12, 2015, 10:10:59 AM
234  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: US-China (& Japan, South China Sea-- Vietnam, Philippines, etc) on: November 12, 2015, 09:49:12 AM
Ugh  angry
235  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / WSJ: Erdogan and the Kurds 2.0 on: November 12, 2015, 09:45:04 AM
Powerful Again, Turkish President Erdogan Faces Choice Between War and Peace With Kurdish Militants
So far, leader is sticking to hard-line rhetoric
By Yaroslav Trofimov
Nov. 12, 2015 5:30 a.m. ET

ISTANBUL—As a consummate politician, Recep Tayyip Erdogan has benefited from renewed war with Kurdish militants to rally voters and regain control over Turkey in a rerun of elections this month.

As a once-again powerful president, Mr. Erdogan now is facing a momentous choice. Should he press on with the war in hopes of finally crushing the PKK Kurdistan Workers’ Party? Or should he row back and eventually restart the peace process with the PKK that he pursued in the earlier years of his rule?

“If Turkey doesn’t resolve its Kurdish issue, it will turn into another Syria,” warned Bayram Balci, a Turkish affairs specialist at Sciences Po university in Paris. “Kurdish populations are gathering strength across the Middle East, and no Turkish leader can afford to ignore that.”

So far, Mr. Erdogan is sticking to the hard-line rhetoric that, during the Nov. 1 election, helped him lure Turkish nationalist voters opposed to any compromises with the Kurdish minority’s aspirations for self-rule.

“The period ahead of us is not one of talks and discussions; it’s a period to achieve results,” Mr. Erdogan said in a speech last week, adding that Turkey will keep hitting the PKK “until all its members surrender or are eliminated.”

Following the vote, the PKK has also pledged to intensify the war.

“A free and democratic living can only be attained by means of a committed resistance against those who trust they can break the will of the peoples,” said the group, which is classified as terrorist by Turkey and the U.S.

Middle East Crossroads

In recent months, hundreds of people have died in fighting between the PKK and Turkish security forces, many of them civilians. Scores of urban areas in Kurdish-populated southeast Turkey have effectively become no-go areas for authorities.

“Both sides are sharpening their knives,” said Tahir Elci, a prominent attorney and head of the bar association in Diyarbakir, the biggest city in Kurdish-dominated parts of Turkey. “Both sides are chasing utopian goals. Both sides are getting farther from what is reasonable.”

And yet, many leaders on both sides also know that they cannot defeat each other on the battlefield.

The PKK and the Turkish state, after all, have been at war since the 1980s, in a conflict that cost at least 40,000 lives and depopulated large parts of the southeast—without destroying the PKK.

“The military solution has not been successful for more than 25 years,” said Umit Pamir, the former Turkish ambassador to NATO and the United Nations.

Mr. Erdogan was once seen as a peacemaker and enjoyed the support of many Kurds, thanks to lifting some long-standing restrictions on Kurdish language and culture. His apparent readiness to settle the Kurdish problem prompted the PKK to declare a cease-fire in 2013.

But the military successes of a PKK affiliate, which now runs a ministate in Syrian areas along Turkey’s border, have spurred a backlash. In recent months, Mr. Erdogan repeatedly expressed displeasure with the PKK affiliate’s victories against Islamic State in Syria, saying he sees no difference between the two organizations.

The cease-fire collapsed in July, shortly after Mr. Erdogan’s AKP Justice and Development Party lost its parliamentary majority for the first time in 13 years—in part because of an unexpectedly strong showing by a Kurdish party backed by the PKK.

On Nov. 1, as Turkish voters sought stability amid renewed violence, AKP regained a comfortable majority in a rerun election.

That majority should enable Mr. Erdogan to tackle the Kurdish conflict, some of his allies say.

“It was Erdogan who had initiated the Kurdish opening, and now that he has emerged from the second election in a position of strength, I hope he will resume the Kurdish opening where it was left off,” said Yasar Yakis, one of the founders of AKP who served as Mr. Erdogan’s foreign minister. “If it’s not done by Erdogan, it can never be done by another leader.”

Galip Dalay, research director at the al-Sharq Forum think tank, forecast that Mr. Erdogan would in coming months try to woo Kurdish citizens with concessions on issues such as language rights—while still refusing to negotiate with the PKK.

“It’s taken for granted that there is no military solution, but you cannot go back to the talks as if nothing happened,” Mr. Dalay said. “The peace process in its previous form and structure will not go on for quite some time.”

Such an approach, however, is unlikely to quell the spreading unrest.

“You now have a very nationalistic Kurdish new generation that is not willing to settle for cosmetic changes,” said Gönül Töl, director of the Turkish studies center at the Middle East Institute.

A choice to press on with the military campaign may also underestimate the potential costs to Turkey, which must increasingly grapple with a separate threat from Islamic State.

“The risks of failing to grasp the refreshed opportunity for a political solution are quite serious,” said Francis Ricciardone, head of the Middle East Center at Atlantic Council who served until last year as U.S. ambassador in Ankara. “No matter how bad things may appear in this region, history shows that they can always become far worse.”
236  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Kurds and US launch attack on: November 12, 2015, 01:56:41 AM
Kurdish officials, with U.S. help, have launched an offensive against ISIS in Iraq, The A.P. said

Wednesday, November 11, 2015 11:55 PM EST

Backed by American air power, Kurdish officials early Thursday morning announced the start of a ground offensive to retake the western Iraqi town of Sinjar from Islamic State fighters and cut a major jihadist supply line between Syria and the Iraqi city of Mosul, The Associated Press reported.
The plan called for American airstrikes to open the campaign. Meanwhile, thousands of Kurdish pesh merga fighters, joined by Yazidi forces, prepared to sweep down from Mount Sinjar and attack fighters for the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, on multiple fronts.
237  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Rambling Rumination: Tomorrow is promised to no one on: November 11, 2015, 09:31:28 PM

Rambling Rumination:  Tomorrow is Promised to No One
by Marc "Crafty Dog" Denny
(c) 2015 all rights reserved


It is my wont to greet my birthday with "Another year closer to death!"  Occasionally I greet friends' birthdays in this manner; usually they are not sure how to take it!  Regardless, it is true: every day we live brings us closer to death.  In this regard I take to heart the words of Castaneda's "Don Juan" about using death as an advisor.


I cannot say I know my friend, neighbor, and fellow martial arts instructor Morgan well.  Indeed, Our friendship has consisted mostly of watching the UFC together and discussing martial arts.  I have found him to be an extremely knowledgeable observer of the MMA scene and the fight history of the fighters as well as an unusually perceptive analyst of the fights themselves. Ours has been a friendship of a shared interest.

Morgan is fifty five years old.  He and his wife Vanessa own the other house on the same plot of land in which our house is located.  As such, we regularly run into each other around the parking area or coordinating rolling the garbage cans to and from the curb.

As I write this Rambling Rumination Morgan lies quite close to death due to throat cancer; he may die tonight.

In his battle with cancer, he has never wavered from composure. The doctors first told him he had an 80+% chance of recovery and after months of chemo was told he had beaten the cancer. Then, the cancer returned a few months later. 

What does one say when being informed of such news?  What does one say each and every time one runs  into him as neighbors do?  All words feel banal , , , but with Morgan there has been no need for such words. 

He has had no complaints. No "Why me?!?" No mention of "Well, now that I know my time is short, I am finally going to do This and That!" for Morgan was already living the life he wished with his wife, Vanessa. 

Instead, he took great joy in seeing to it that his material possessions went to those to whom they would serve best.  In my case I availed myself of his inversion table and some books. My son chose a spear with a tri-tip.  He made sure to talk to the adolescent son of a friend who was dabbling with cigarettes to serve as an example of the foolishness of this path.

He brought to mind a story I was told many years ago of a friend's father who was on his death bed on a Sunday with the family assembled around him. They asked what he wanted to do and he replied "What do you think? It's Sunday and the Detroit Lions are playing!"  He happily watched the game because that is what he did on Sundays during the football season, and passed peacefully sometime in the third quarter.

In Morgan's case there has been an ongoing quiet parade of friends coming by to hang out for a bit, to walk his dog "Bob", to help with grocery shopping or picking up medicine, and so forth. 

One day we were all invited to come by to say goodbye, and some fifty or so of us were in attendance.

Obviously, the potential for pathos and self-pity are high in such a moment.  Though many got teary and lost composure as they told Morgan what he had meant to them, Morgan never did.  When my time came, my words were few and I spoke simply of being able to tell a man had lived well when he changed nothing in his way of living in the face of bad news.  There was a moment of eye contact between Morgan and me, and perhaps I flatter myself but I think he felt understood in that moment.

By showing me how to die, Morgan has taught me something profound about how to live and I will remember him.  I know not whether I will be a fraction of the man he has shown himself to be should I be blessed and cursed with foreknowledge of my time, but I do know that between now and then that he will be a tuning fork for me with which to test, and if necessary, reset my spiritual vibrations.


This year there has been a glorious Indian Summer well into October with the temperature typically being in the 80s and the ocean in the mid 70s.  It has been as if the summer would last forever.

I am not a particularly good swimmer and I find doing laps in a pool exceedingly boring , yet back in July while standing on the bluffs while overlooking the ocean at Avenue C I saw a buoy that the lifeguards told me was about 200-250 yards out and it occurred to me to take it as a challenge-- both physically and to my fear lingering from a near death experience in which a strong rip tide carried me out to see in Buzios,  Brazil many years ago. see . I checked in with the life guard, put on some boogie board swim fins, and set out.

At first, even with the flippers, the 1/4+ mile swim was a real challenge for me-- but unlike a pool where one can quit whenever one gets lazy or challenged, here there was no quitting until I was on the beach again! 

Each day I went for my swim I honed various details in my stroke, form and breathing. I also listened to the chatter of my mind, and frequently it had to do with sharks.


I remembered the opening scene of the movie "Jaws" wherein a girl was having a moonlight swim and got hit from below and her scream cut off as she was taken under leaving only silence and the eternity of the ocean where her life had been but moments before.  And so I looked for birds diving into schools of feeding frenzies.  I looked for shark fins cutting through the surface towards me.  I mentally replayed news reports of numerous shark attacks on the east coast (North and South Carolina and Florida mostly)  and , , , central and northern California.   I mentally replayed local news reports about how there are juvenile Great White Sharks where I was swimming that went off shore as they grew above 6-8 feet and imagined an eight foot great white swimming up to me.  Would he be just curious, or would he be sizing me up for dinner?

Then I would remind myself that of the millions of people swimming in the ocean of Los Angeles that none had been attacked by sharks. 

This had a calming effect , , , until I said to myself "Yeah, but how many of them are a couple of hundred yards offshore?  Perhaps a few serious folks training for triathlons and the like-- but there are not many of those!" 

And so my chatter would resume.

Some of you who have known me for a while may remember that from time to time I speak of the "mental chatter" in the days before the fight.  It is my understanding of a concept that I take from Buddhism, and the path to Buddhism's goal of stilling the mind is one I have found in the higher consciousness of real contact stick fighting--  with the meaning of the solution experienced being one I look to apply throughout my Life.


At present, in this regard I am meditating upon an internet meme I posted recently on my FB page wherein two friends are sitting together on a dock overlooking a large body of water. One says "Death is inevitable.  One day we will die" and the other responds, "Yes, and we will be alive every day until then."

And so I like to think that if I have time to reflect when my time comes that amongst the days I have lived well will be one where I stood at the top of the bluffs overlooking the ocean on a day when everything was perfect.  At 10:00 the temperature was already eighty and the cloudless sky a gorgeous blue.  The surface of the ocean was like glass, the water was clear.  As I stood on the bluffs sizing up if there were any rip currents, I knew the water would be warm.  I knew there was a life guard to keep an eye on me as I pretended to bravely challenge my flippered self with a quarter mile swim-- and I knew my wife and two children awaited me at home, a mere five minutes away.

The perfection included my fears of the unseen sharks lurking in the ocean serving as death's counsel to live my Life well.  The perfection included my fears of one day getting myself killed overdoing my challenge to myself to overcome my fears anchored to my near-death experience that day in Buzios.

I experienced deep connection to a deep sense of gratitude to our Creator and walked down the ramp to the beach to continue with the next step of my little buoy swim ritual and told the life guard "I'm going out to the buoy and back.  If you see me anywhere else, come get me!"

Later, as I was approaching the wave break coming back in, a small pod of dolphins swam by me about thirty yards away.  They too had fins that broke the surface, but unlike the lateral undulations of a shark's spine, theirs was vertical and so I knew them to be dolphins and not sharks.

Tomorrow is promised to no one, and death will come to us all someday, but that day was not one of them and I lived it fully alive and with gratitude.
238  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Missouri U. oppresses trust fund baby on: November 11, 2015, 08:39:56 PM
239  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Meme about Hillary being fired off the Watergate Committee. on: November 11, 2015, 07:06:44 PM
240  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: TPP Trans Pacific Partnership on: November 11, 2015, 02:22:57 PM
That is a very fair question and it bothers me that candidates I otherwise like do not seem to have a good answer to it.
241  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Senator Marco Rubio on: November 11, 2015, 02:20:50 PM
I agree that this is a fair question and would be quite surprised if Rubio does not get to hear it quite a bit more.
242  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: November 11, 2015, 02:19:18 PM
"Cruz made a nice dig at "sugar subsidies" - without naming Rubio.  He made the point gracefully and substantively without making it unnecessarily personal and by doing it that way took away Rubio's opportunity and obligation to respond."

I too noticed this , , , and forgot to mention it in my commentary above.  Very shrew play by Cruz, including not mentioning Rubio by name.  It seems quite likely we will be hearing more about this  wink  Also, his one liner about illegals with journalism degrees was devastating IMHO.

"Lastly, doesn't Bush have a lot of other cool things he could be doing.   )"


"Trump said that China had a backdoor into TPP whenever they wanted it, and this is true. In fact, this is evidenced by Kerry just offering China to joint TPP."

I missed this.  Someone please flesh this out on the TPP thread.

"Also with Fiorina, when she talks and I watch, I cannot get her head and body movements and  facial expressions out of my mind. They are very distracting and IMO seem to lessen her arguments and appealability. Each time, it is like being lectured to by an ex-wife."

 cheesy  I think you may have nailed it.  cheesy  OTOH major kudos to Carly for her repeated attacks on baseline budgeting!!!  cool cool cool

"TPP, he is against as is only a couple of other candidates. As the details become know, it might help him, but it is still a wonkish issue. Immigration is still the biggest issue in the campaign. Watch to Europe and as things worsen there, it will only help Trump."

Good points.
243  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Islam in America on: November 11, 2015, 02:10:24 PM
244  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Sen.Ted Cruz on: November 11, 2015, 11:48:23 AM
"On TPP, the vote was for TPA, which both Ryan and Cruz voted for. It removed 66% votes for passage and changed it to 50% plus 1. This legislation provided for Fast Track Authority where by Congress will not have future inputs into regulation changes. The WH wants it, and it is implemented."

Please flesh this out on the TPP thread.  Thank you.
245  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / A first take by CATO on: November 11, 2015, 11:20:19 AM
246  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Sen.Ted Cruz on: November 11, 2015, 11:07:35 AM
Hmmm , , , interesting comments Doug. 

Please flesh this out "but does not fully explain that this applies to every economic act and dollar, not just applied to profits after all expenses are deducted."

"This is a regressive tax in that the sales tax part of it hits the lowest income hardest."   There is a sales tax in the mix?

247  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: November 11, 2015, 11:02:45 AM
I would like to begin by saying I thought it was a very well thought out and very well run debate. The questions were excellent and everyone got a fair amount of time. The overall level of the candidates was quite good, even the under card. The longer time allotted for answers enabled more substantive discussion and most of the candidates stepped up their respective games.

Some snap impressions:

Under Card:

While Santorum made the best of his weak hand, I thought Christie showed very well here and showed some grit as a man in how he dealt with the fact of being there. Maybe he will return to the main stage?

Main Event in no particular order:

Kasich: The man has a very strong resume (serious work on serious committees as a long time Congressman and as governor of Ohio) and seems very angry that the voters are interested in non-politicians. On a human level I can understand that, but on a number of issues he misses the mark for me. With regard to the back and forth Cruz and he had over whether to bail out a large failing bank, I confess to being baffled at the idea that depositors might be wiped out. What about the FDIC? (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation) Isn't if for exactly this sort of situation? Anyway, I think he comes out of the night worse for the wear.

Bush: Did much better than previously, and scored well against Trump with the need for America to be the Leader and not the Policeman. Did well in describing how Dodd-Frank favors the big banks over community banks, but then got too far into the weeds (along with Kasich) I think with the capital requirement thing, though perhaps the point was to show his depth. His plain statement in favor of Amnesty will remind the great majority of Rep voters who oppose this of just how much he means it. Scored well against Trump on Trump's "Fine with me to have Putin in Syria" strategy. Still, I think it was not enough to change his rankings or flat trajectory-- and his closing statement was very weak.  Doug's assessment that his candidacy only makes sense if he is a front runner (who can win) seems dead on to me.

Fiorina: Once again, impresses, I particularly liked her point about how the government created the bubble and when it burst created the "solutions" that it now creates the problems it will "solve" with even more government and how this is the road to socialism. She through a really nice elbow at the Donald after he did a name drop thing about getting along with Putin when they both appeared on "60 Minutes" when she commented that she too had met with Putin but that it had not been in the waiting room for a TV show. Not sure why, but my intuition is that despite another strong showing she will not get a big bump in the polls. She remains positioned well for VP however.

Rand Paul: A very good night for him, he seems to have found his mojo. A major bitch slap scored against Trump when in response to a question about the TPP Trump blathered on about China and it's currency manipulations Rand interjected to point out that China was not a signatory to the TPP. Though Rubio answered well, he engaged strongly with Rubio on Rubio's family credit in his tax proposal and spending increases. Although I don't see him as becoming a major contender, I feel he added to the night and very much hope he is reelected in Kentucky-- and given how much noise he made about coal it would appear that this is on his mind wink emoticon

Cruz: A very good night for Ted. I have always had great respect for Ted. His legal career is simply extraordinary. His grasp and love for our Constitution is superb. He has shown political courage. That said I have worried about the narrowness of his life experience and his political skills in reaching those less intelligent than him (i.e. most people) but he continues to move up in my estimation in these things e.g. his tax plan and his ability to describe it as benefiting real people.

Rubio: As usual displayed tremendous ability to handle questions on his own terms, tremendous preparation on a wide range of issues especially foreign affairs, and superb speaking skills. As other candidates drop out I can see him picking up a lot of their supporters.  

Carson: Of course everyone was curious to see how he would handle the inevitable question about the challenges to the credibility of his life story and I thought he came through with flying colors. Turning to the merits I confess to being pleasantly surprised at the depth and specificity of his answer to a "what to do in the Middle East?" question. Though he does not push for the spotlight as the others do, he turned in a fine night. Superb closing statement. In the spin zone after he continued to invite deep substantive questions on all issues; it would not surprise me if he surprises with quality answers when those questions come.

Trump: Though his numbers may remain where they are, IMHO this was not a good night for the Donald. No more domineering the stage and the moderators for him as the substance level goes up! He statements that previously seemed bold now seem lacking and his insults (to Kaisch and Fiorina last night) small and petty instead of witty. IMHO Trump has peaked. He has the support he is going to get and will not go up from here. He has served the process well by breaking the mold by taking on the PC police and the media but my prediction is that as various candidates drop out, their supporters will not go to him but instead to other of the remaining candidates.

Overall I came away from the night encouraged by the depth of the Rep bench. The contrast with the Dem bench is glaring. Name me 12 Democrats you could put to a crucible like last night. Regardless who gets the nomination, should the Reps win a lot of these people would make for an absolutely extraordinary cabinet. Should the Reps hold both houses of the Congress, amazing things could get done and maybe, just maybe, America can turn things around.

The three that have most of my attention in this moment are Carson, Rubio, and Cruz.
248  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: November 10, 2015, 09:59:35 PM
Actually I thought the JV debate was quite good, with Christie really showing well.  Having only four candidates allowed for much more time and substance in the answers.

Halfway through the main event right now, taking a breather.
249  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Judge rules for man who shot down a drone with his shotgun on: November 10, 2015, 06:19:26 PM
250  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / FBI cranking it up? on: November 10, 2015, 03:27:09 PM
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 700
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!